Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > diff --git a/t/t5401-update-hooks.sh b/t/t5401-update-hooks.sh > > index 3eea306..9734fc5 100755 > > --- a/t/t5401-update-hooks.sh > > +++ b/t/t5401-update-hooks.sh > > @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ test_expect_success setup ' > > > > cat >victim/.git/hooks/pre-receive <<'EOF' > > #!/bin/sh > > -printf "$@" >>$GIT_DIR/pre-receive.args > > +printf %s "$@" >>$GIT_DIR/pre-receive.args > > Do you really mean this? "printf %s 1 2 3" writes "123" without > terminating LF. You seem to check only for size but to be > reusable you might want to use something like: The only thing we care about is was there args or not to the hook. I probably could do that test differently, like say: echo $# >$GIT_DIR/pre-receive.args and then test that the file contains "0" instead of looking for it to be empty. Not sure why I didn't write it that way in the beginning. > printf '%s\n' "$@" Eh. Since all we care is that the argument count is 0 we probably should be looking at $# and calling it a day. -- Shawn. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
